im not even going to do any commentary on this article. im just going to link it. you read it, then check back here to take a very important test. i know this seems weird. just go along with it, because it will help you determine whether or not checking this blog more in the future is worth your time. here's the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/27/sports/baseball/27cheer.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
ok, youre done reading? good. now answer these 2 questions. (no peeking at the answers printed below!)
1. on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the highest and meaning "totally awesome", how good is this article?
2. what was your first reaction to the article once you were done reading it?
a. that is absolutely terrible, why would an editor approve that?
b. are you sure this isnt from "the onion" or "sports pickle" or something?
c. this writer should be fired, and possibly legally restrained from being within 1000 feet of a media outlet's offices lest she somehow get another writing job and repeat this performance
d. i dont know, it wasnt that horrible... i mean, it didnt completely offend my intelligence
answers (i wish i knew how to make this appear upside down, that would be fun):
1: if you are not a yankee fan, the only acceptable answer is 1. if you are a yankee fan, ill let you get away with answering 2 because its been a frustrating season and you can relate to the author's sentiment. but no higher.
2: a, b, or c, preferably c.
if you did not answer both questions correctly, please close the browser window and never come back to this site. im not calling you dumb or anything, but clearly our perceptions of "good" and "bad" sportswriting are so diametrically opposed that theres no point in you reading what we write here.
i dunno...i mean it was in the ny times...so it's not like it was on a national site.
ReplyDeleteit still was stupid, but homerism for a home team paper isn't exactly a capital crime
you must not have read the same article i did. ill check the link. its not about homerism, its about a completely moronic and pathetic theme of the writer being "in a relationship" with the team.
ReplyDeleteFUCK man, I answered 1.5 for the first question. Well, do what you gotta do, looks like I'm off the list of contributors for this blog.
ReplyDeletethe only reason this article was published is because the author was a woman. a man would never get away with such BS--talk about a double standard in sports writing.
ReplyDeletealso, if you really love a team, you never, NEVER leave them.
I loved this article, because it summarized everything I've ever known about Yankee fans. "I used to love the Yankees, but since they started not winning, I don't like them as much. If they win the World Series, I will once again love them."
ReplyDeletei disagree, helen. guy writers get away with that kind of shit all the time - they just couch it in more manly terms and call it a brotherly relationship rather than a love relationship.
ReplyDeletei bet tommy is stewing!